United States v. Crompton Corp.

Good Law
399 F. Supp. 2d 1047·2005 WL 3090997·2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39525
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 22, 2005CR 04-0079 MJJCalifornia2,191 words

Opinion

Opinion

Jenkins, J.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO UNSEAL THE REQUESTED DOCUMENTS AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S REQUEST TO HAVE NAME REDACTED

INTRODUCTION

Before the Court is the Government’s motion to unseal the Crompton Plea Agreement (“Plea Agreement”), the transcript of the sentencing hearing, and the United States’ Brief in Support of Its Motion to Unseal Certain Documents. While Defendant Crompton Corporation (“Defendant”) does not oppose Plaintiffs motion to unseal the documents, it seeks to have Vincent A. Calarco’s name redacted from any documents prior to having them unsealed. The Court has read and considered the memoranda filed by the parties and heard oral argument on the motion. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS the Government’s motion to unseal the requested documents and DENIES Defendant’s request to have Calarco’s name redacted.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

On March 15, 2004, the U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division filed a one-count information charging Defendant with fixing the prices of certain rubber chemicals in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. On May 27, 2004, Defendant pled guilty to that charge and was sentenced to pay $50 million pursuant to the terms of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.